Watch A Quiet Passion For Free

Don't listen to the negative reviews

The movie turns out to be a little better than the average. Starting from a romantic formula often seen in the cinema, it ends in the most predictable (and somewhat bland) way.

True to its essence, the characters remain on the same line and manage to entertain the viewer, each highlighting their own distinctive qualities or touches.

The tone of this movie is interesting -- the stakes are both dramatic and high, but it's balanced with a lot of fun, tongue and cheek dialogue.

(Flash Review)I have zero experience with poetry so was hoping to gain insight into what made Emily Dickenson a literary icon. For some reason the director omitted the core middle part of her life. It focused on her childhood and her later years. What an odd way to scope this film. So you peer into her childhood as she wrestled with her faith and late in life as she was a stubborn, snarky and anti-social woman. What light was the director trying to showcase her in? The only insight into her poetry were some spliced in poetic narration moments. The film is plum full of sophisticated dialog, many quiet moments of contemplation and quality cinematography. There wasn't really much of a plot so you just watch time pass and several snippy conversations as Emily interacts with gentlemen suitors and potential publishers. Thus, I started to peek at my watch with 30min remaining. There was however, a really bad-ass time period transition from childhood to adulthood. The film needed a scope rethink.

This movie is way to slow, and does not contain enough substance for a two hour film. The opera scene was way to long without enough script to justify it being there at all. The actor simply say their lines with little or no emotion, and there is really no point, they just walk around the garden or the camera pans the room while nobody talks. I only made it through the first 40 minutes before being bored to tears so I cant fully judge this movie. however; from what I DID see I would never recommend this film.

It's like Terence Davies sets out to make movies that will challenge you to stay awake through them. If I do, do I win something? Because I should.After the mournful and glacially paced "The Deep Blue Sea," I didn't think a film could come along that would more effectively numb me into somnolence. But lo and behold, here comes "A Quiet Passion," and by the same filmmaker, no less!"A Quiet Passion" tells the story of Emily Dickinson, who, as played by Cynthia Nixon, was about the most. miserable. person. ever. to spend time with. You know that friend who has the ability to suck the fun out of absolutely any situation? That's our Em. She'd be the girl who would join a group of friends (if she had any) at a football game and then spend the entire time complaining about the pointlessness of football. According to this biography, Dickinson was a frustrated artist who held people to unrealistically high moral standards and refused to accept the slightest weakness in anyone. This made her a riot to be around, as you can imagine, and caused her to die -- shocker!! -- alone and miserable.The film is funereally paced, and consists of one monotonous scene after another in which Dickinson gets her knickers in a twist about one thing or another and yells at whoever happens to be in the room with her. You might think so much yelling might at least give the film an ounce of energy, but you would be wrong. I've never been so excited in a movie to see a main character start exhibiting symptoms of a mysterious disease, because I knew then that it wouldn't be long before she died and the movie would be over.All I can say is thank God for the lovely Jennifer Ehle, who plays Dickinson's sister as a human being you might want to actually have a conversation with without wanting to stab her or yourself in the eye with the butter knife.Grade: F

The intention here is to create a novel in form and movement. It is like most Davies's films, styled in the same characteristic manner. The form means scenes progress in a way that is reminiscent of Bergman's Cries and Whispers' that is, complete in themselves and not always related to the previous action.Within this template the film is quite successful: the design and the actors, all contribute to something that strives to make a film about an artist. That may not be very interesting and its presentation is quite static, but then, so were the lives of the people depicted.Where it is flawed is the script, which, no doubt was crafted with some attention, yet, with a limited set of rhetorical devices: paradox, homily, hyperbole, irony, for instance; it soon becomes quite irritating. So many scenes run through a few set pieces with these rhetorical plays which are intended to amuse but repeat themselves and without any forward motion. There it resembles Bergman too: the self chastising, the self examination, accusation and reproach; the moral duty to become better, and while this may recreate the anxieties of the people involved, it is not accomplished writing.Unfortunately this film has the moral worthiness of chapel instruction without a better insight into its subject.